[cryptome] Cryptome is Back: BBC Monitoring Service.

From: doug <douglasrankine2001@xxxxxxxxxxx>

To: cryptome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2014 23:12:59 +0100

Dear Colleagues,

Ah! How nice it is to see Cryptome back on line...it seems like an age
where I have been living in the dark...not knowing what is happening in
that world of ours which is so full of openness, democracy and the
pursuit of happiness and human rights, that it is coming out of my
ears! All that catching up to do too. I see I shall have to cut back
my contributions to cryptome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx...;-) .

There was a programme on BBC last night called "Newsnight" which had an
article on BBC Monitoring at Caversham. Apparently, the BBC, which is a
state owned organisation created by Royal Charter and funded by every
television owner in the UK whose television is capable of receiving live
television, by paying an annual licence fee of almost £150, is
collecting "open source" information on behalf of clients who request
information or ask certain types of questions. For this they are
charged a fee. However, if the information is classified as secret or
confidential, it is not made available to the BBC as a whole, or, more
importantly, to the license payer. BBC monitoring has been around for
a long time and provides a valuable service gathering data, collating it
and sorting and sifting it, but why is it, that I as a licence payer
don't have access to it, and why is it that not all BBC journalists are
allowed access to some of it.

Apparently there is a small group of journalists, who do get told some
of what is going on but they require security clearances, and can't
divulge it to other BBC personnel. The spokesperson used a number of
different justifications for the practice, but like the BBC World
Service being the tool of the Foreign Office, again paid for by the
licence payer, does this practice not affect the independence of the BBC
according to its Charter? Not only that, but, according to a reporter
who visited the property at Caversham, the CIA also has a floor there,
which no one without a security clearance can visit. A historical
anomaly....maybe...but where does that leave independent, unbiassed and
open reporting...not that one would suggest that the C.I.A. is anything
else but a law-abiding and democratic organisation, having all of our
best interests at heart, even us foreigners who aren't covered by the
U.S. Constitution...

So much for the independence of the BBC, in terms of its reporting, once
again it is the tax-payer wot foots the bill, subsidising stuff which
would be better paid for elsewhere.